Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Expansion of Executive Power
Here is a question I would love for someone in a public forum to give to all three candidates. I have an idea as to how each would respond (if given truth serum). But I am curious as to what you think their responses would be.
"The Bush Administration has withheld vital information from Congress, refused to explain the reasoning behind policy decisions to the public, and blatantly politicized the Department of Justice, in an effort to strengthen the power of the chief executive. What is your view of the role of the executive branch and will you voluntarily roll some of these powers back or will you capitialize on the executive's new found power?"
I imagine Sen. McCain will try to portray himself as a reasonable Republican by disavowing the politicization of the Department of Justice and pledging to remove politics from AG decisions. He would probably call for a strong executive, particularly in a time of war and tell us that 9/11 changed the world.
I imagine Sen. Clinton say the same as McCain (without the 9/11 reference). She would probably agree not to be as secretive as Bush administration, particularly with Congress, to avoid attacks that she would be no different as a power-hungry executive, than Bush. I have no doubt that she would be more transparent than Bush, however her history (particularly with HillaryCare) has not borne that out, so maybe I am being kind.
I imagine Sen. Obama would decry the secrecy, rightfully blame it for deceiving the public to support the Iraq War and subsequent occupation (BTW, when are we going to stop calling it a war and start calling it an occupation?), pledge to keep the Dept. of Justice politic-free, and recall his advocacy of ethics reform to assure us that his administration would be as transparent as possible. (I can only dream that as a constitution scholar, he would question the constitutionality of Congress giving the president an authorization to wage war without a formal declaration from Congress).
What do you think, both about the question and about the response?
Comments (2)
The issues is crucial, but the three suggested responses all are inadequate. We have lost a basic right that goes back 900 years to the Magna Carta--the right of habeas corpus. We have lost most of our rights under the Bill of Rights. About the only "right" that still exists is the right to bear arms. The suggested responses you have outlined all would leave most of this despicable situation in place. A much more aggressive response in favor of basic human rights is needed. What would you do to re-establish habeas corpus? What would you do to make us secure in our persons and our papers? What would you do to take away the threat of being placed on a "no fly" list--a list that causes people to keep quiet because they fear. What would you do to stop the police from creeping away with our freedoms, such as the bogus searching of bags on the NY subway? Basic issues that even TPM doesn't raise. Why? Because we are afraid of the weak responses from the Democrats? On these issues, Bush-Cheney succeeded only because of the collusion of the Congressional Democrats and we all know it.
April 24, 2008 9:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
You can go to the barackobama.com website and look at his issue papers on the subjects you address.
April 24, 2008 10:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment